Presidential Race

Parent Cafe
141

<p>“I really wonder about the WMDs. I mean that. I really wonder. If it’s so plausible that so many people in so many countries got so much wrong once, who’s to say that it couldn’t/didn’t happen again.”</p>

<p>Especially when there was likely only one source of non-intelligence. Many countries did get it wrong - they trusted the United States. They won’t get fooled again. </p>

<p>If you (or anyone else) is so worried about WMDs, what about Pakistan? Second largest Islamic population in the world. Largest Islamic fundamentalist population in the world. Largest number of links to 911. Has 30-50 nuclear weapons; continues to enrich uranium and make plutonium. Likely has other WMDs as well. Government is likely about three gunshots away from being ruled by Bin Laden surrogates. </p>

<p>The point is the WMD thing is a sham. Always has been. The only country to use poison gas was the one which did so under the auspices of the Rumsfelf handshake, and has managed to conceal the evidence by executing the country’s leader before the case concerning them could ever reach a trial docket. </p>

<p>Wanna see WMDs? Why don’t you come up and see the plants in Seattle, or the poison gas storage faciltiies in eastern Washington and Oregon?</p>

142

<p>^^^Evil, as always, resides in the Great NorthWest, not the Middle East…‘grunge’ would be another example.</p>

143

<p>The debate of whether the books were cooked is a canard. While it is clear to me and others like me that the disinformation about “yellow cake uranium”, so-described missile tubing, connections between al-Qaeda and Hussein were all fabrications pushed by the DoD’s Office of Special Plans to mislead Congress and the nation into war, some people just won’t be convinced by obvious realities.</p>

<p>So it’s better to confront them with plain statements: Wolfowitz, paraphrased: “General S. was grossly wrong when he said we’d need 500,000 troops.” Actually, it turns out he was right. The Administration: “We will be welcomed with flowers in Iraq.” A type of flower called IED, I guess. Bush Photo-op: “Mission Accomplished.” Uh, except that this war has now lasted more than WWII. Cheney, last year, paraphrased: “The insurgency is in its final throes.” We just had one of the worst days in Iraq for US fatalities last week, and don’t even talk about Iraqi deaths.</p>

<p>So, on the balance of truth and information, who has been lying about issues crucial to war and security related to our country? And who on this board shows worse than a lack of imagination, in fact just willful blindness, when they focus on lies and characters of Democrats who haven’t even been elected to office and in fact aren’t even in charge.</p>

<p>I think some people need to get themselves a non-partisan grip.</p>

144

<p>I beleive you mean Les Fleurs du Mal</p>

145

<p>

</p>

<p>The Deputy Secretary of State is the Bush White House.</p>

146

<p>"If you (or anyone else) is so worried about WMDs, what about Pakistan? "</p>

<p>I am deeply worried about Pakistan. My boss is a Pakistani whose relative is a prominent journalist there and things I’ve been told make me sleepless.</p>

147

<p>

</p>

<p>I agree. However, I am still willing to chalk it up to water over the dam. It’s a distraction from the more pressing question: Where do we go from here?</p>

<p>We can’t turn back the clocks. The cooking of the books, the invasion of Iraq, the sectarian civil war in Iraq…all of that is already done. We can’t change it. </p>

<p>What we can do is look at the situation as it exists today and determine what course of action best serves vital US interests. If we are to continue a war in Iraq, there needs to be a rationale behind it. That is the crux of the matter.</p>

148

<p>“The Deputy Secretary of State is the Bush White House”</p>

<p>By no stretch of the imagination is that true. The Deputy SEcretary of State is a representative of the State Department. Bush administration? Yes. White House? No.</p>

149

<p>"If you (or anyone else) is so worried about WMDs, what about Pakistan? "</p>

<p>Would this be the same Pakistan that is providing safe refuge for Osama Bin Laden and training schools for Al Queda?</p>

150

<p>

</p>

<p>By that measure, Condoleeza Rice does not speak for the Bush White House and Donald Rumsfeld was not responsible for Bush White House defense policy. Does the term “cabinet member” ring a bell? The are all executive branch departments reporting to the White House.</p>

151

<p>“Would this be the same Pakistan that is providing safe refuge for Osama Bin Laden and training schools for Al Queda?”</p>

<p>I would think so, no?</p>

152

<p>

I couldn’t agree more.</p>

153

<p>The public and the world was presented with information about WMD precisely once, by one person, representing one country. He didn’t come from Italy, Russia, Germany, France, England, Lower Slobovia, or Palau. All the information that the so-called neo-cons mouth about the opinions of folks in other countries comes from Judith Miller and her ilk at the NY Times.</p>

<p>He was a known liar who had gone on national tv in 1991, announcing that the U.S. had destroyed 22 Iraqi SCUD missile bases in their entirety when he actually knew they hadn’t destroyed a single one. Anyway, this known liar was given ten years worth of so-called “evidence”. The BEST evidence available anywhere. Evidence from the Clinton Administration, evidence from the Bush Administration, evidence from the would-be Chalabi Administration. All that wonderful foreign “intelligence” (which of course came from the United States - to this day, no other country in the world has publicly vetted their "WMD (non)-intelligence). Out of this, the liar cherrypicked the very BEST evidence he could find to present to the United Nations in a couple of hours, with the whole world watching.</p>

<p>And so he did. The lies were found out within 48 hours. The so-called chemical weapons depot was a Kurdish tribal chief’s headquarters, under US CONTROL, found by a semi-amateur reporter in less than two days. The “mobile labs” were basically the equivalent of “Good Humor” trucks. The “thousands of tons” of WMD didn’t exist anywhere but in eastern Washington and Oregon. </p>

<p>Now, mind you, this was the BEST evidence, presented by the best liar the Adminstration could afford. Meanwhile, more nuclear weapons were being produced, and who knows what else, in Pakistan. </p>

<p>NONE of those guys (or girls) deserves to be President. They don’t lie well enough, and should be ashamed of themselves. Meanwhile, the Democrats are abandoning the troops by funding them to go about their business in support of the latest pack of lies - the biggest being that Petraeus “agrees” with sending 21,500 additional troops - he said they need 250,000 in Baghdad alone. </p>

<p>He won’t last long.</p>

154

<p>“The are all executive branch departments reporting to the White House.”</p>

<p>That may be true in some sense, but the fact of the matter is that Plamegate was a public display of inter-administration warfare, with the “White House” being on one side and the State Department on the other. The distinction is important here.</p>

155

<p>It was the lies of the Secretary of Lies (whoops, I meant “State”) that were being unravelled.</p>

156

<p>

</p>

<p>Evidence that shocked the State Department Intelligence analysts when they heard Powell deliver the speech because they had provided written intelligence reports debunking all of that evidence.</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/10/14/60II/main577975.shtml[/url]”>http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/10/14/60II/main577975.shtml&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p><a href=“http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/truth/interviews/thielmann.html[/url]”>http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/truth/interviews/thielmann.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p><a href=“NOW on PBS | PBS”>NOW on PBS | PBS;

157

<p>

</p>

<p>Great. So the books were cooked and we went to war because the State Dept. and the White House were squabbling.</p>

<p>I would just accept my offer to call it “water over the dam” and quit while you’re ahead. <g></g></p>

158

<p>It was all lies, he knew they were lies, and I think the best face that can be put on it is that he cherrypicked the lies so that he WOULD be found out within 48 hours.</p>

<p>(And there was NO independent foreign intelligence…they made that up, too.)</p>

<p>Anyhow, he was found out anyway. And Bush went to war anyway. Do you think anyone up there, given the situation in Pakistan, really cared one iota about WMD?</p>

159

<p>I think they cared about WMD because they knew that it was the only issue that would generate Congressional and public support for an invasion of Iraq.</p>

160

<p>

</p>

<p>The deputy secretary of state is a political appointee of course he represents the Bush administration.</p>